US spy agencies admitted today that they secretly listened in and recorded telephone conversations of the staff of Republican Presidential candidates and then leaked the information to US news media and Democrat Party operatives in an attempt to influence the US elections.

In a desperate attempt to discredit Trump and win the election for Hillary the NSA, FBI and other Obama-controlled agencies conducted a secret operation attempting to find dirt on Trump and ensure a Democrat victory in 2016. They admit they operated under the pretext of investigating national security concerns while continually leaking the information to the press.

Concerns continue to grow that the dark agencies are really the people controlling our government and not elected officials.

The intelligence agencies then sought to learn whether the Trump campaign was colluding with the Russians on the hacking or other efforts to influence the election.

What techniques and methods did the "intelligence agencies" use to surveil the Trump campaign? Who authorized this? Did they leak their findings to the media or Trump opponents? Was this really a legitimate concern or a political witchunt?

In fact, as this article points out - Obama specifically issued new rules regarding NSA spying on Americans in order to make it easier for Obamabots in the spy agencies to carry out their coup against the new government. It's an attempted coup folks. Plain and simple.

good thing they did - look what they are up to - using encrypted phones to negotiate against a sitting President Obama in secret. That doesnt even consider the fact the Russians definitely were spying, hacking against the Democrats and promoting Trump.

thanksobama Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> good thing they did - look what they are up to -
> using encrypted phones to negotiate against a
> sitting President Obama in secret. That doesnt
> even consider the fact the Russians definitely
> were spying, hacking against the Democrats and
> promoting Trump.
>
> Thanks for having our back President Obama

"......one of those circumstances includes leaking the contents of intercepted communications, as defined this way by 18 § 798 of the U.S. Code:

Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates … or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes … any classified information … obtained by the processes of communication intelligence from the communications of any foreign government … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."

Dude. If they had any of the targets in an actual recorded conversation doing anything illegal - we would all know about it. Would have known about it months ago. They would have leaked it. They have leaked everything else. The fact that they have no evidence of anything is all you need to know.

Hostile, hysterical reporting based on anonymous leaks provides no hard facts — just “narratives” that could come out of a creative writing class.

Take Wednesday’s breathless New York Times story, “Trump Aides Had Contact With Russian Intelligence” — which was remarkable for containing the same facts the Times reported back in October as “Investigating Donald Trump, FBI Sees No Clear Link to Russia.”

Both reports say various Trumpites talked to figures in Russia’s government — but that US investigators found nothing to show they’d discussed the US election, or that anyone on Team Trump was even aware of any effort by Moscow to influence it.

Oh, and the Times also reported Jan. 19, “Intercepted Russian Communiques Part of Inquiry Into Trump Associates.”

How many times can the Times recycle the same stuff and still call it news?

And now that this “civil war” has begun, it is being reported that there are some within the intelligence community that are absolutely determined to destroy Donald Trump. In fact, one former NSA analyst says that he got a message from a friend still inside the intelligence community that stated that Trump “will die in jail” once this civil war is over…

Sorry OP but communications with the Russians are all monitored. It doesnt matter if they are calling Domino's or a private citizen not yet appointed as head of the NSA. They listen to us we listen to them. Funny thing is Flynn tried to use an encrypted phone but we had the encryption. felon and loser General Flynn now disgraced and thrown to the wolves by Trump

thrown to the wolves by Trump Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sorry OP but communications with the Russians are
> all monitored. It doesnt matter if they are
> calling Domino's or a private citizen not yet
> appointed as head of the NSA. They listen to us
> we listen to them.

There appears to have been no foreign-intelligence or criminal-investigative purpose served by the FBI’s interrogation of General Flynn. It is easy to see why Democrats would want to portray Flynn’s contact with the Russian ambassador as worthy of an FBI investigation. But why did the FBI and the Justice Department investigate Flynn — and why did “officials” make sure the press found out about it?

first, that Obama’s team tried to get a warrant from a regular, Article III federal court on Trump, and was told no by someone along the way (maybe the FBI), as the evidence was that weak or non-existent;

second, Obama’s team then tried to circumvent the federal judiciary’s independent role by trying to mislabel the issue one of “foreign agents,” and tried to obtain a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act “courts”, and were again turned down, when the court saw Trump named (an extremely rare act of FISA court refusal of the government, suggesting the evidence was truly non-existent against Trump); and so,

third, Obama circumvented both the regular command of the FBI and the regularly appointed federal courts, by placing the entire case as a FISA case (and apparently under Sally Yates at DOJ) as a “foreign” case, and then omitted Trump’s name from a surveillance warrant submitted to the FISA court, which the FISA court unwittingly granted, which Obama then misused to spy on Trump and many connected to Trump

Clapper was also asked on "Meet the Press" if he had any evidence that the Trump campaign was colluding with the Russian government while the Kremlin was working to influence the election.

"Not to my knowledge," Clapper said, based on the information he had before his time in the position ended.

"We did not include anything in our report … that had any reflect of collusion between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians. There was no evidence of that included in our report," he said. "We had no evidence of such collusion."

When Todd asked him whether he could confirm or deny if a FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court Act) order for this existed, Clapper declared, "I can deny it."

Asked again whether there was a FISA Court order to monitor Trump Tower, Clapper said, "Not to my knowledge."

Clapper said that if any wiretap like that occurred, he would "certainly hope" that he would be aware of it.

"I can't speak for other authorized entities in the government or a state or local entity," he added.

So was the Fake News Media lying are is Clapper lying? Or do we need a lawyer to parse through what he is denying. I suspect all three. He appears to be making a very narrowly constructed denial of the FISA order.

Well at least we get to see what it would have been like if Obama had prosecuted all the scandals under Bush - a scandal presidency. Everywhere Donnie turns its a 'total disaster' 'worse than watergate' What a stupid pussy this guy is.

Learn to fucking govern instead of ranting like a cuck and playing golf in luxury every weekend. For fuck's sake he is supposed to be protecting us.

what a dick Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well at least we get to see what it would have
> been like if Obama had prosecuted all the scandals
> under Bush - a scandal presidency. Everywhere
> Donnie turns its a 'total disaster' 'worse than
> watergate' What a stupid pussy this guy is.
>
> Learn to fucking govern instead of ranting like a
> cuck and playing golf in luxury every weekend.
> For fuck's sake he is supposed to be protecting
> us.

So are you saying that the FISA tapping happened and that there are recordings and transcripts of Russian collusion as lib media and Dems have been claiming for months or that there was no tapping and no evidence as they're now saying after Trump raised the rather obvious related question of, if so, then how and where the tapping was done? It's getting hard to keep track of the various directions that you're backpedalling in lately.

Democrats’ efforts to raise suspicions about alleged — and, thus far, imaginary — links between President Donald Trump’s campaign and the Russian government may have backfired spectacularly.

The spotlight is now on President Barack Obama and his administration’s alleged surveillance of the Trump campaign, as well as his aides’ reported efforts to spread damaging information about Trump throughout government agencies to facilitate later investigations and, possibly, leaks to the media.

... it cannot be glossed over that, at the very time it appears the Obama Justice Department was seeking to surveil Trump and/or his associates on the pretext that they were Russian agents, the Obama Justice Department was also actively undermining and ultimately closing without charges the criminal investigation of Hillary Clinton despite significant evidence of felony misconduct that threatened national security.

This appears to be extraordinary, politically motivated abuse of presidential power.

Thanks in advance. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> To all the Deep-State idiots who think Obama still
> controls the CIA and FBI please tell me why they
> let Comey bump Hillary's polling numbers down a
> critical 5% just before the election.

The White House acknowledged Tuesday there are people working in the government who are likely part of what has been called the "deep state" – an inner core of Obama loyalists seeking to stop the Trump presidency.

During Tuesday's White House press briefing, Newsmax's John Gizzi asked White House press secretary Sean Spicer about David Horowitz's new book "Big Agenda" and claims Horowitz has made that a "deep state" has been seeking to undermine President Trump.

"This has been widely repeated on social media: Does the president himself believe in this deep state?" Gizzi asked.

Spicer replied: "I've been asked this question before, and I'll give you the same answer I've given before. This has been going on since the country came to be, where people burrow in after an administration into a civil servant job."
He added, ominously, "But, sure, there are people after eight years of Obama that found their way into government, so it should be no huge secret."

Last week, Trump confidant and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich also said the deep state is real.

"Of course, the deep state exists," Gingrich said. "There's a permanent state of massive bureaucracies that do whatever they want and set up deliberate leaks to attack the president.

"This is what the deep state does: They create a lie, spread a lie, fail to check the lie, and then deny that they were behind the lie."

The Real Reporter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The White House acknowledged Tuesday there are
> people working in the government who are likely
> part of what has been called the "deep state" –
> an inner core of Obama loyalists seeking to stop
> the Trump presidency.
>
> During Tuesday's White House press briefing,
> Newsmax's John Gizzi asked White House press
> secretary Sean Spicer about David Horowitz's new
> book "Big Agenda" and claims Horowitz has made
> that a "deep state" has been seeking to undermine
> President Trump.
>
> "This has been widely repeated on social media:
> Does the president himself believe in this deep
> state?" Gizzi asked.
>
> Spicer replied: "I've been asked this question
> before, and I'll give you the same answer I've
> given before. This has been going on since the
> country came to be, where people burrow in after
> an administration into a civil servant job."
> He added, ominously, "But, sure, there are people
> after eight years of Obama that found their way
> into government, so it should be no huge secret."
>
> Last week, Trump confidant and former House
> Speaker Newt Gingrich also said the deep state is
> real.
>
> "Of course, the deep state exists," Gingrich said.
> "There's a permanent state of massive
> bureaucracies that do whatever they want and set
> up deliberate leaks to attack the president.
>
> "This is what the deep state does: They create
> a lie, spread a lie, fail to check the lie, and
> then deny that they were behind the lie."
>
> http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/White-House-deep-s
> tate-trump-obama/2017/03/21/id/780036/

House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes said Wednesday that the U.S. intelligence community collected multiple conversations involving members of Donald Trump’s transition team after he won the election last year.

The disclosure may bolster Trump’s effort to back up his disputed claim in Twitter postings that former President Barack Obama tapped his phones, which his spokesman later said shouldn’t be taken literally and referred generally to having his team under surveillance.

IT'S NOT OK FOR SPOOKS AND POLITICIANS TO USE OUR INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES TO UNDERMINE AND CONSPIRE AGAINST THE DULY ELECTED PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

Members of the Donald Trump transition team, possibly including Trump himself, were under U.S. government surveillance following November’s presidential election, House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) told reporters Wednesday.

Nunes said the surveillance appeared to be legal but that he was concerned because it was not related to the FBI’s investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election and was widely disseminated across the intelligence community.

Nunes said his new information appears to show that additional members of the Trump transition team — beyond former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn — were unmasked. This means they were identified in U.S. intelligence reports.

He said the information that he had seen and was disseminated across the intelligence community appeared to him to have "little or no apparent intelligence value."

The Real Reporter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Deeper Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Comey helped Trump win so how is he part of the
> > deep state?
>
> You mean like when he let Hillary off the hook?
>
> Saying, "Although there is evidence of
> ...violations of the statutes regarding the
> handling of classified information, our judgment
> is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such
> a case."
>
> Yeah, by not prosecuting Hillary he helped Trump
> win. Sure.

He said this in public - no reason to
He brought it up again just before the election
He didn't bring up team trump was under investigation

No Evidence Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A republican said "It's possible that an
> intelligence agency accidentally captured some
> communications from Trump."
>
> What a laugh. Intelligence agencies have been
> capturing every Americans internet and cellphones
> since Bush gave them the right to spy on all
> Americans. It's called Condor and Prism.

This is why none of the data-collection and surveillance should ever be allowed. We are trusting the government and the spooks themselves to be honest players and subject to the rule of law. Now they show themselves to be political hacks and dishonest usurpers. Do away with these spy programs. Repeal the laws. Take away the spooks toys. We can't trust them.

House intelligence committee investigation took a dramatic shift this week after newly disclosed intelligence reports suggested the Obama administration improperly gathered and disseminated secret electronic communications from President Trump and his transition team prior to inauguration.

The explosive reports uncovered by Nunes contradict public testimony Monday by FBI Director James Comey and National Security Agency Director Adm. Mike Rogers.

Republican congressional investigators expect a potential “smoking gun” establishing that the Obama administration spied on the Trump transition team, and possibly the president-elect himself, will be produced to the House Intelligence Committee this week...

The intelligence is said to leave no doubt the Obama administration, in its closing days, was using the cover of legitimate surveillance on foreign targets to spy on President-elect Trump, according to sources.

Should point out that these "foreign targets" had NOTHING TO DO WITH RUSSIA. These spooks knew what foreign contacts (non-Russian) Trump and his staff were calling and then monitored their conversations under the guise of normal foreign entity surveillance. Police state stuff.

The Washington Post's Bob Woodward warned on Wednesday that there are people from the Obama administration who could be facing criminal charges for unmasking the names of Trump transition team members from surveillance of foreign officials.

Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense in the Obama Administration admits that Trump was spied on and that they tried to hide both the source and how the information was being disseminated to "the hill."

I was urging my former colleagues, and, and frankly speaking the people on the Hill [Democrat politicians], it was more actually aimed at telling the Hill people, get as much information as you can – get as much intelligence as you can – before President Obama leaves the administration.

Because I had a fear that somehow that information would disappear with the senior [Obama] people who left; so it would be hidden away in the bureaucracy, um, that the Trump folks – if they found out HOW we knew what we knew about their, the Trump staff, dealing with Russians – that they would try to compromise those sources and methods; meaning we no longer have access to that intelligence.

So I became very worried because not enough was coming out into the open and I knew that there was more. We have very good intelligence on Russia; so then I had talked to some of my former colleagues and I knew that they were also trying to help get information to [Democrat politicians].

Evelyn Farkas is also a senior fellow of the Atlantic Council - the Atlantic Council is funded in part by the US State Department, NATO, the governments of Latvia and Lithuania, the Ukrainian World Congress, and the Ukrainian oligarch Victor Pinchuk. The Atlantic Council has been among the loudest voices calling for a new Cold War with Russia.

And guess who else is a senior fellow of the Atlantic Council? Dimitri Alperovitch – the founder and CTO of CrowdStrike! Alperovitch is head honcho of the Atlantic Council’s “Cyber Statecraft Initiative”.

CrowdStrike, aka Dimitri Alperovitch was the organization that initially claimed they had evidence the Russians were connected to the Trump organization. A claim they have subsequently walked back:

The real scandal is probably not going to be Trump’s contacts with Russians. More likely, it will be the rogue work of a politically driven group of intelligence officers, embedded within the bureaucracy, who, either in freelancing mode, or in Henry II–Thomas Becket fashion (“Who will rid me of this meddlesome priest?”) with Obama-administration officials, began monitoring Team Trump — either directly or more likely through the excuse of inadvertently chancing upon conversations while monitoring supposedly suspicious foreign communications.

Added to this mess is the role of three unsympathetic characters who are on record as either not telling the truth, deliberately obfuscating it, or showing terrible judgement.

Obama CIA director John Brennan, who assumed that role after the still mysterious and abrupt post-election departure of David Petraeus, has a long history of political gymnastics; he has made many a necessary career readjustment to changing Washington politics. He is on record as being deceptive — he failed to reveal that the CIA intercepted Senate communications. He also stated falsely that the drone program had not resulted in a single collateral death. And, in the spirit of Obama’s new Islamic outreach, Brennan strangely suggested that jihad was a sort of personal odyssey rather than a call to use force in spreading Islamic influence. Brennan is also on record as critical of Trump: Trump “should be ashamed of himself,” Brennan said the day after the inauguration, in response to Trump’s speech to CIA staffers gathered in front of the Memorial Wall of Agency heroes.

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper has in the past lied to Congress, when he assured that the NSA did not monitor the communications of American citizens. Likewise, he bizarrely asserted that the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt was largely a secular organization. And more than 50 CENTCOM officers formally accused Clapper of distorting their reports about the Islamic State. Like Brennan, Clapper has been critical of Trump, asking, “Who benefits from a president-elect trashing the intelligence community?”

During the 2016 election, FBI Director James Comey popped up to assure the nation that while Hillary Clinton had conducted herself unethically, and probably in violation of federal statutes in using her private e-mail server for government business and wiping away correspondence, her transgressions did not rise to the level of indictable offenses. It was as if the investigator Comey, rather than the appropriate federal attorney, was adjudicating the decision to charge a suspect.

Then in the final stretch of the race, Comey resurfaced to assert that “new” evidence had led him to reconsider his exculpation of Clinton. And then, on November 6, 2016, just hours before the nation went to the polls, he appeared a third time in front of cameras to reiterate his original judgment that Hillary’s transgressions did not merit further investigation, much less criminal prosecutions. The media contextualized Comey’s schizophrenia as see-saw reactions either to liberal Obama-administration pressures or to near revolts among the more conservative FBI rank-and-file. Just as likely was Comey’s own neurotic itch to seek public attention and to position himself favorably with a likely new president.

a) you didn't read it.
b) it's way beyond your intelligence level. Even if you did read it you don't have the mental capacity to understand it. It doesn't have any f-bombs, raging insults or childish taunts so you wouldn't get it.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Trump wouldn't answer whether he knew if his
> campaign was having contacts with Russians. I
> noticed how he refused to give it a yes or no
> answer yesterday.

Dozens of times in 2016, those intelligence reports identified Americans who were directly intercepted talking to foreign sources or were the subject of conversations between two or more monitored foreign figures. Sometimes the Americans’ names were officially unmasked; other times they were so specifically described in the reports that their identities were readily discernible. Among those cleared to request and consume unmasked NSA-based intelligence reports about U.S. citizens were Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice, his CIA Director John Brennan and then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch.

This will prove the Obama administration was using systematic spy information collected by our intelligence agencies to keep tabs on President-Elect Trump and his transition team. This is a CRIME.
Attachments:

The Real Reporter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Good story here:
> https://www.wsj.com/articles/what-devin-nunes-know
> s-1490914396
>
> This will prove the Obama administration was using
> systematic spy information collected by our
> intelligence agencies to keep tabs on
> President-Elect Trump and his transition team.
> This is a CRIME.

1. The surveillance that led to the unmasking started way BEFORE Trump was the GOP nominee

2. The person who did the unmasking is very high up in the intelligence world and is not in the FBI

3. The people reported by the NY Times were not Nunes sources. They only helped him navigate the intelligence

4. Nunes was told about the unmasking of Trump’s team back in January BEFORE Trump’s tweet about Obama’s spying.

5. It took a while to coordinate Nunes seeing the intelligence reports in order to protect his source. They chose the White House because it was the only other location they could view the reporting without outing the source.

I'm tired of everyone just accepting the Dem/Media line that all these communications were obtained via “incidental collection”.

We do not know if all of this information is, in fact, incidental to the surveillance of a legitimate foreign national security target. We have been led to believe that the Flynn intercept was the result of legitimate surveillance of the Russian ambassador. However, what if that is not true? What if the information was acquired through surveillance of communications to and from Trump’s organization?

Further, what if they were monitoring foreign targets solely for the purpose of intercepting Trump and Trump associates communications? Is that legal? I.e. "we know who they are calling - so we will monitor that foreign person." That is what Farkas made it sound like they were doing. "We know who they are calling so we are listening in on those people."

Once you wave away all the smoke created by our dishonest media, the story of this past week was pretty simple. The Trump-Russia-Conspiracy narrative is falling apart. The Obama-Spied-on-his-Political-Opposition narrative is coming together.

That the Obama Gang was using intelligence on Republicans to try to thwart a Trump administration from erasing Obama's legacy — that's a huge story, a scandal almost as big as the fact that Obama used the IRS to decimate the Tea Party movement. If there were even a single honest editor at the network news departments or CNN or the New York Times, this would end with some high-level Obama and Hillary cronies doing perp walks.